CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 15 juin 1989

.sDD6737AE { font-size:11pt } .s211D6B00 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; line-height:normal; widows:0; orphans:0; font-size:8.5pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial }  The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 54 (art. 54) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as "the convention"),   Having regard to the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in the Weeks case, delivered on 2 March 1987 and 5 October 1988 and transmitted the same days to the Committee of Ministers;   Recalling that the case originated in an application against the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 6 April 1982 under Article 25 (art. 25) of the convention by Mr Robert Malcolm Weeks, a British citizen, who complained that his re-detention in June 1977, after his release on licence while serving a sentence of life imprisonment, was not in accordance with Article 5, paragraph 1 (art. 5-1), of the convention and that, contrary to Article 5, paragraph 4 (art. 5-4), of the convention, he was unable to challenge the lawfulness of his re-detention before a court or to have periodic reviews of his detention at reasonable intervals throughout his imprisonment;   Recalling that the case was brought before the Court by the Commission on 14 March 1985;   Whereas in its judgment of 2 March 1987 the Court held:   -   by sixteen votes to one, that there had been no breach of Article 5, paragraph 1 (art. 5-1);   -   by thirteen votes to four, that there had been a breach of Article 5, paragraph 4 (art. 5-4);   -   unanimously, that the question of the application of Article 50 (art. 50) of the convention was not ready for decision;   Whereas in its judgment of 5 October 1988 the Court, having been informed of an agreement reached by the Government of the United Kingdom and the applicant concerning the latter's claim for costs and expenses and having found that the agreement was of an equitable nature, took note of the agreement and decided unanimously to strike the case out of its list as far as the applicant's claim for costs and expenses was concerned;   Whereas under the above-mentioned agreement the Government of the United Kingdom was to pay to the applicant, in full and final settlement of his claim for costs and expenses, the sum of £2 500 less the amounts received from the Council of Europe by way of legal aid;   Whereas in the same judgment of 5 October 1988 the Court unanimously:   -   held that the United Kingdom was to pay to the applicant the sum of £8 000 for damage;   -   rejected the remainder of the claim for just satisfaction;   Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers concerning the application of Article 54 (art. 54) of the convention;   Having invited the Government of the United Kingdom to inform it of the measures which had been taken in consequence of the judgments, having regard to its obligation under Article 53 (art. 53) of the convention to abide by them;   Whereas, during the examination of the case by the Committee of Ministers, the Government of the United Kingdom gave the Committee the information set out in the appendix to this resolution;   Having satisfied itself that the Government of the Unitoed Kingdom has paid to the applicant the sums provided for in the judgment of 5 October 1988 and in the agreement referred to therein,   Declares, after having taken note of the information supplied by the Government of the United Kingdom, that it has exercised its functions under Article 54 (art. 54) of the convention in this case.   Appendix to Resolution DH (89) 18   Information provided by the Government of the United Kingdom during the examination of the Weeks case before the Committee of Ministers   Having regard to the jurisprudence of the Court of Appeal which provides that offences for which life sentences are imposed must be serious offences, it is unlikely that in future, a life sentence would be imposed in a case comparable to that of Mr Weeks.   The sums of £8 000, for damage, and £1 793.33, for costs and expenses, have been paid to the applicant.